User talk:Samwalton9/RfA/Ser!
Pre-RfA discussion[edit]
@Ser!: I've created this page so I can draft my nomination statement and you can draft your answers to the standard RfA questions. Before that I had some questions/observations for us to go over.
For starters, from what I've seen the biggest talking point is likely to be edit count - see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/0xDeadbeef for a recent example where this came up a lot. There, the editor had made 8,000 edits over 2 years. You've made 7,000 over 7 years, which I personally think is a better place to be in, and I can speak to this in the nomination statement. I just might expect some oppose votes from folks who have a higher figure as their minimum standard.
What kind of administration work are you interested in working on? That's the history we'll need to dig into in a little more detail to see if anything is likely to be brought up.
Are there any times in the last year or so where you think you didn't handle a situation as well as you could have done, or where you came into conflict? Sam Walton (talk) 18:50, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, I certainly understand that some may be a little apprehensive about me being a candidate due to my edit count, though I will be making the case that among these edits I have logged a large amount of actions at boards requesting administrative actions - as you highlighted in your message on my talk page, particularly around the area of page protection. That would be one of the main areas I'd be active in if my candidacy is successful. I regularly nominate pages which are the subject of vandalism or frequently targeted by socks, and I would estimate around 96% of my page protection requests have been implemented (with one or two more being declined but protected within the next 2-3 days), which is a decent benchmark for RfPP in my view. If given the tools, I would be able to protect these pages and prevent further vandalism.
- As well as that, I would like to be active in combatting disruptive editors. If successful in my candidacy, I would like to be active at WP:AIV, in reviewing and dealing with disruptive editors that have been reported by others, as well as being able to handle vandals who I see active who haven't been reported yet.
- In terms of conflict in the last year, nothing particularly jumps to mind - I have had occasional disagreements with other editors (as is natural), but these have been on article talk pages rather than through edit warring, and I believe I handled these as well as I could have. The only situation I can think of where I look back on it and think "I probably could have done better here" was in a page dispute with a POV-pushing IP editor on World Bank. Admittedly, this editor did call me "tyrannical" and sarcastically "Einstein", so I may have been a little less nice in my slightly sarcastic edit summary than I usually would be, but I understand why I shouldn't have done that here and why as an admin this may cause a problem. Beyond that, I'm happy with everything else. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 19:17, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Ser! Sorry for the delay in responding :) The above all sounds good to me and I can't see those disagreements causing any real issues. I have been speaking to a potential co-nominator and they're interested but advise that it would be best to wait a few more months to increase your chances of the RfA going smoothly.. They'd particularly be interested in seeing you get an article to GA status if possible. What do you think? Sam Walton (talk) 22:38, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds fair enough to me! I've always been interested in getting a GA, the main issue is just finding something to write about in enough detail that it'd qualify for a GA! But I would certainly be open to waiting a few months; no pressure at all. — ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 00:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Ser! GAs needn't be long as long as they're reasonably comprehensive - one of mine is only just over 600 words! Sam Walton (talk) 10:05, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, I see! If you wouldn't mind though, I'd certainly be open to some advice on what could be made a GA, as I'm not entirely sure. I think from the articles I've started, at the moment the ones with the most potential are Shygirl and Sam Gellaitry, as both are musicians with a photo to illustrate. Other than that, I'd be interested in potentially doing something in the area of Irish politics as I have expanded a few articles in that area - two that jump to mind are Ged Nash and Cannabis in Ireland. — ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 14:21, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Ser! Ged Nash or Shygirl seem like the best candidates to me - Cannabis in Ireland feels like a big undertaking! Sam Walton (talk) 15:00, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Fair enough then, I've had another look at Ged Nash to make sure all is cited and sorted, and nominated it. I'd certainly love to get a few more articles to GA status, it had been something I wanted to do for a while but had no idea quite how to, so thanks for giving me this push in the right direction! ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 12:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Ser! Ged Nash or Shygirl seem like the best candidates to me - Cannabis in Ireland feels like a big undertaking! Sam Walton (talk) 15:00, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, I see! If you wouldn't mind though, I'd certainly be open to some advice on what could be made a GA, as I'm not entirely sure. I think from the articles I've started, at the moment the ones with the most potential are Shygirl and Sam Gellaitry, as both are musicians with a photo to illustrate. Other than that, I'd be interested in potentially doing something in the area of Irish politics as I have expanded a few articles in that area - two that jump to mind are Ged Nash and Cannabis in Ireland. — ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 14:21, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Ser! GAs needn't be long as long as they're reasonably comprehensive - one of mine is only just over 600 words! Sam Walton (talk) 10:05, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds fair enough to me! I've always been interested in getting a GA, the main issue is just finding something to write about in enough detail that it'd qualify for a GA! But I would certainly be open to waiting a few months; no pressure at all. — ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 00:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Ser! Sorry for the delay in responding :) The above all sounds good to me and I can't see those disagreements causing any real issues. I have been speaking to a potential co-nominator and they're interested but advise that it would be best to wait a few more months to increase your chances of the RfA going smoothly.. They'd particularly be interested in seeing you get an article to GA status if possible. What do you think? Sam Walton (talk) 22:38, 22 December 2023 (UTC)